Did the search but not satisfied Q6600 vs Q9450

[EvilSponge]

Hello all,

I have been waiting for Q9450 but after seeing some benches and thinking things over
ie cost I'm beginning to wonder if Q6600 is the way to go. I mean the I understand the fundamental differences Q6600 8 meg catch vs Q9450 12M catch and the lower heat and power consumption of the Q9450 plus SE4 command for encoding video.
The 8x multi is a drawback also the release price is what $326-356 and the Q6600 is like $239 -250 so what to do?

My current system specs are as follows:

MB Abit- IP35-E
Power supply Enhance 500W 80 plus
CPU E2160 @ 3.2ghz
cpu cooler Thermaltake Ultra 120 w/ yateloon 120m fan
HD samsung spinpoint 3g sata 500gig
gfx card EVGA 8800GTX 650/1000
ram 4gigs crucial ballistix PC6400 4-4-4-12
sound soundblaster extreme music XFI
Case Lian-Li
Many 120mm fans
display Viewsonic VG2230wm
OS Vista 64 Ultimate runs flawlessly

I encode allot of mpeg to xvid for viewing on my media center PC via my NAS server
I also game ie UT3, Crysis, FEAR Combat the other usual suspects
I also do work ie office apps, and multitasking

Curious to hear what people think taking into consideration my current hardware and usage which way they would go and why.

-Eric

 

[Tempered81]

good point, also - q6600's are 199 now.

 

[Quiksilver]

Personally I would take the Q9450 over Q6600 (its what I plan on doing) because in your case you do a lot of encoding and I would believe the extra cache would actually be a much larger improvement in that general area. In any case the maximum OC most people can get on air with a Q6600 is 3.4 to 3.6Ghz, so its not like would be to far off if you were to use a 1:1 ratio with a Q9450 (assuming you use DDR2-800), even still you could just OC the memory up to DDR2-900+ to get that 3.6Ghz or higher.

In short:
Your not going to lose much performance between the two and in some cases you might even gain performance due to the extra cache, one this is for sure though: it won't be as hot as a Q6600 so you don't have to spend $65 on a top of the line cooler to get those huge OC's like you do on the Q6600 (of course I'm talking about the TRUE12 and Tuniq). So really, while it may cost more up front you can have a little more play room in a few areas.

 

[EvilSponge]

Well I already have a capable cooler last I checked a Thermalright Ultra 120 can keep a Q6600 pretty cool. I'm sizing things up on cost as well but I see what you are saying.

-Eric

 

[imported_Jackyl]

Where exactly are you seeing Q6600 for $199? Current prices are $250-279 everywhere. You don't need 3rd party cooling for Q6600. The retail heatsink is good enough, even with an overclock of 3.6GHz. Mine is running 56-58c on stock cooling. Low enough temps and 100% stable.

 

[Imported]

Microcenter has the retail for $200, in store only though. I'm running mine comfortably at 3.3, haven't really pushed it further yet.

 

[BakaTsuchiro]

got mine fro mc yesterday too think i got a volatge hungry chip from 3.4 to 3.6 i need around almost .1 vcore

 

[rchiu]

Just got mine from MC too, simply don't wanna pay 50%+ premium when Q6600's 4 cores at 3.4~3.6ghz (hopefully, haven't set it up yet) is more than enough for my need. (encoding, gaming, programming...etc, general stuff)

 

[EvilSponge]

Yeah that's what I'm thinking is Q9450 worth the preimum?

-Eric

 

[theprodigalrebel]

They are both going to net you similar overclocks. The Q6600's temperatures will start to get unmanageable in the mid 3Ghz range even with the best coolers. The Q9450 will have better temperatures and much lower power draw but the FSB wall and low multiplier will limit you to the same range.

In the end, at roughly the same clockspeeds, you are talking about a 10% performance advantage for the Q9450. Don't put much stock in the DivX test because from what I remember, those gains were only to be had when using 'Exhaustive Search' Motion Estimation algorithm. I am not entirely familiar with DivX but at least where x264 is considered, it is ridiculously slow (enabled in the HQ Insane profile) for no perceivable quality gains when compared to the faster RDO (Rate Distortion Optimisation).

I am no codec expert but I remember reading some discussion threads where everyone was of the opinion that the Exhaustive Search benchmark is meaningless because there is no scenario where enabling it would be a good idea. Using a conventional ME algorithm like RDO won't get you the 80% gains that we were promised. I haven't used DivX/XviD in a long time though so I may be a little out of the loop.

If my knowledge on this matter is a little out-of-date, someone please feel free to correct me.

Do check out the Q9300 - 2.50GHz / 1333Mhz FSB / 6MB L2 Cache - MSRP $266 review on Xbitlabs, the Q6600's replacement. It's only 100MHz faster, has 2MB L2 LESS and still manages an average 7% faster lead at stock.

Q9300 compared to Q6600 at stock speeds:
->6.6% faster in XviD
->7.7% faster in DivX
->11.3% faster in Mainconcept H.264 encoder

Not bad for a 4% increase in clocks and 25% less L2 cache. Throw in the power consumption chart (70W less when running overclocked, Q9300@ 3.5GHz vs Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz) and you just might have a winner, except for the 7.5x multiplier. A great motheboard would be required for dang sure.

But if I had to choose between a $200 Q6600 and a $275 Q9300, I'd save $75. It depends on what $75 and max overclockability means to you. I realize this thread was originally about the 9450 so sorry for straying slightly off topic.

 

[devil machine]

The price difference is too big if you consider the performance between the two cpus. In my opinion, Q6600 is a better choice for the moment.

 

[Cheex]

Well, I hope to acquire a Q9450 somewhere along the line and here is why...

Clock-for-clock Yorkfield (Q9450) is faster than Kentsfield (Q6600).
Q9450 has 50% more L2 cache than the Q6600...12MB vs 8MB.
45nm provides better temperatures and lower power draw.

However, on price/performance...the Q6600 really is hard to beat...AND...it will get even harder to beat come April 20 when the Intel price cuts happen.
Q6600 is to come down to $224
Q6700 is to come down to $266

Q9450 is scheduled to be released at $316

Keep in mind that these are MSRP.

I would still pick a Q9450 over those anyway...

 

[EvilSponge]

Yes my other issue is that I won't be adopting Neheim the next gen quad with integrated memory controller for some time so
I may be better served for the long term with Q9450 but will they really be $316 a pop I have not see that price on froogle

-Eric

 

[EvilSponge]

Well I guess I have waited this long might as see it through also want to see some more benches when the chip is finally released thanks for those who responded

-Eric

 

[Tempered81]

check xbit labs, they have a comprehensive yorkfield benchmark review, so does toms and anand.